iamnivtop Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 Remember when 27th Lancers took 7th place (Allentown?), 15 points behind the Garfield Cadets, yet took high drums?Or when the Bridgemen pulled off nearly the same trick at DCI? Clean beats used to be the measuring stick with ensemble contribution a secondary or "separate" consideration. The criteria today (since 1984, really, and evolving to 2007) has changed, whereby musicality and ensemble is absolutely emphasized and the "clean beats" portion is wrapped into effect. Is that a "bad" thing from a production, programming and achievement standpoint? I don't think so, and for several reasons. First, and foremost, the separate captioning for "horns" and "drums" may have created different goals for these sections WITHIN THE CORPS ITSELF, perhaps fragmenting the true "team" dynamic and creating separate "sections" within the ensemble. Even if this only existed by suggestion, it is counterproductive to cohesive effort and achievement. IMO, not hearing about "who took high drums" and, instead, seeing, hearing, evaluating and appreciating the ensemble as a whole magnifies the experience. Second, the top down approach (start at 10.0 and "tic" your way down or separating sections by "performance, a la the 1988 sheet) means the risk-reward equation is tilted towards "not making errors". This system encouraged "watering down" difficult parts, passages and transitions late in the season rather than searching for "added effect." I remember Boston Crusaders snareline (at their home show in July) dropping to one knee to play an extended roll and paradiddle passage and the place went crazy. By DCI, that "effect" was taken out...sacrificed in the name of "clean beats." The bottom up approach to the sheet provides a better incentive for achievement. If you start at ZERO, but can EARN a 10.0, there is an inherent desire to aim high. The risk-reward equation keeps asking for MORE (a good thing!). And the combination of demand and cleanliness produces effect which moves you up a box. And at that point, the real "judging" of achievement ends, and ordinals begin. Isn't that cool? I agree with what your saying to a point. As said in my OP I believe that the majority of the scoring should be based on a build-up system. But IMHO I feel that there should be a challange to be as clean as possible also. This way if a corps waters down a performance to pick up an extra ten points in execution, they will suffer on the overall side, however the corps that can put together a knock down drag out show plus execute, well, hot-#### Margo, they deserve to win that night. BTW, do away with the 'high horns' or 'high drums' trophy. It's all to be judged as an overall experience. Would just think that maybe a clean Crown would then be in the top three, or a clean Cadets can win the whole thing if another top three corps has an off night execution wise (okay, so that I don't offent anone, just insert the corps of your choice instead of the ones I mentioned!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithHall Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 The tic system could change a show big time! You could have placed 5th at prelims at US Open and won finals. These things happened all the time. For the past 20 to 25 years I could go to a show and be 95% to 100% accurate with my predictions. I could predict a show from my reclining chair and never have to go. True! All you do is look at scores, see who is beating who and predict the placement before the show begins. Try it this summer and see how successful you are. You'll never have to go to a competition again...see it later on You Tube for free. purely my opinion, but I miss the unpredictability of the tic system - you didn't know who was going to win on any given night until the scores were announced....at retreat, all corps present on the field. No question that 'judging preference' sometimes came into play, but overall I believe that everyone could tell when one corps was 'off', and another one was 'on', and the placements were generally accepted. and on any given night or day, someone could jump several placements from a previous show.Now, it just seems as though once the placements are set, nothing much changes night to night exept for the spreads. I think adding a judging dimension that allows for unpredictability would be refreshing. just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 How is deciding the cumulative level of flaws at the end of the performance more accurate than recording each one you hear/see as it happens? Evaluating the performance level is more than "counting ticks"...once the judge has made a subjective decision that an event WAS a tick...and how many to assign if it was a group error situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kusankusho Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Evaluating the performance level is more than "counting ticks"...once the judge has made a subjective decision that an event WAS a tick...and how many to assign if it was a group error situation. So waiting until the end of the show and trying to remember how many ticks you heard, was it more or less "ticky" than the 3 previous corps, is more efficient than recording them as they happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 So waiting until the end of the show and trying to remember how many ticks you heard, was it more or less "ticky" than the 3 previous corps, is more efficient than recording them as they happen? No, because that is not how performance is judged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BozzlyB Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Only allowing for 5 points per section in the "tic" categories would end up in a lot of corps just getting 0's in those sections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnivtop Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 (edited) Only allowing for 5 points per section in the "tic" categories would end up in a lot of corps just getting 0's in those sections. Good point. But if it's controlled by an existing caption judge, using a new style of sheet that focuses on the overall effect of the tear on the ensemble, then maybe the shows can go back to an 'any given night' type of scenario. will this still allow for judging to be arbitrary regarding how they tic? Absolutely. But it's already there anyway with the build up system. Edited February 25, 2008 by iamnivtop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kusankusho Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 No, because that is not how performance is judged. If performance is being judged at all there are two ways to do the numerical part of judging (ie not the yakking into a tape portion).... 1 - record problems when they happen - the tick system - not happening right now 2 - mentally evaluate the entire performance as you go along, jot down some notes on the sheets when you feel appropriate, and come up with the number at the end. Now - I'm not a DCI judge. Am I missing something here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnivtop Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 No, because that is not how performance is judged. Which is the whole point of this thread, Mike! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedawn Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 ...or we could eliminate the competitive aspect of the activity altogether, because it seems ludicrous to "judge" performance. (and yes, that goes for figure skating, cheerleading, gymnastics, etc.) :ducks: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.